Keynesian is saving money during booms and spending money during recessions. Yet during booms the money saved is too little and during recessions the money spen

Keynesian is saving money during booms and spending money during recessions. Yet during booms the money saved is too little and during recessions the money spent is too much. Too little or too much with respect to what? you (...) pay down your debt by (...) printing money There is a misunderstanding underlying this sentence which probably explains most of the hyperinflation-phobia that is going on. The truth of the matter is this: both physical money and treasuries (government debt) are liabilities of the government. There are only two differences between them: (a) coupon (interest payment) and (b) maturity. Paying back the debt by "printing money" is just exchanging one maturity for a different one. There is nothing inflationary or defaulting about that. Heck, the US government could just stop issuing bonds with long maturities altogether and it wouldn't change a thing (except for altering the maturity/interest structure of the financial assets held by the private sector). All this debt you're seeing is money that has already been spent. But remember, the purpose of Keynesian approach was to smooth out booms and busts in the economy, yet what we're seeing is making them lasting longer and falling harder. This may be your personal impression, but if you look objectively at the actual data, you'll see that it is incorrect. Whether it can be attributed to Keynes or not, both the frequency and the magnitude of recessions have been much lower since WWII than before. Just before the GFC, some economists even had the hubris to proclaim the business cycle dead.